Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2019 13:13:04 GMT
I'm shocked, non of us knew this was coming did we?
Laughing stock, yet again we become a self inflicted laughing stock.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2019 13:39:18 GMT
I’m a reasonable man but this is beyond a joke. It is legally questionable and, more importantly, immoral to dock a club 6 points for a first offence then decide to soften the rules so much that another club is docked no points for a third offence a relatively short time later.
Ridiculous. Wigan can fudge right off!
|
|
|
|
Post by bandgeekmafia78 on Mar 6, 2019 15:02:56 GMT
Irrespective of whether it was £1 or £1m over the cap, rules are rules. The RFL are a shambles.
I can't imagine a club such as ours would get such favourable treatment.
|
|
|
|
Post by kitch on Mar 6, 2019 18:09:24 GMT
I agree that it's enfuriating that Wigan have got away with it, but the new punishment was decided by an outside independent tribunal to which Wigan and the RFL both submitted. The RFL wanted to dock them two points, it's not their decision to suspend that. |
|
|
|
Post by kreuzbergred on Mar 6, 2019 18:18:06 GMT
Every time youu think the RFL Cannot Make a total Knob up of things , then The go and do it, Just confirming what everybody has known for years Certain clubs operate on completely different rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by bandgeekmafia78 on Mar 6, 2019 18:41:51 GMT
I agree that it's enfuriating that Wigan have got away with it, but the new punishment was decided by an outside independent tribunal to which Wigan and the RFL both submitted. The RFL wanted to dock them two points, it's not their decision to suspend that. I might be wrong, but I thought it was an independent panel that wanted to dock them two points initially as well? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2019 18:44:36 GMT
A precedent has been set now though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2019 18:50:53 GMT
I’ve been arguing about this on Twitter but basically the independent panel made a ruling based on the RFL’s rules on the salary cap. As far as I understand it Wigan challenged the RFL’s interpretation of their own rules rather than the rules themselves.
So if the rules allow enough ambiguity for a three time offender to get away with no points deduction then surely the fault lies here?
The problem with tightening them up would be that someone would then get a points deduction for doing the same thing which wouldn’t be fair. One way around it would be to change the penalties to say a reduction in the next seasons salary cap. But I doubt they will change anything.
Feel free to tell me if I’m wrong as I’m no expert on sporting rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by kitch on Mar 6, 2019 18:53:57 GMT
I agree that it's enfuriating that Wigan have got away with it, but the new punishment was decided by an outside independent tribunal to which Wigan and the RFL both submitted. The RFL wanted to dock them two points, it's not their decision to suspend that. I might be wrong, but I thought it was an independent panel that wanted to dock them two points initially as well? It was the RFL who imposed the initial penalty. Wigan appealed to an independent tribunal who changed it. I think that's right, anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by redunderthebed on Mar 6, 2019 19:22:30 GMT
Yes it’s an independent panel that have changed it to a suspended points deduction. Won’t stop everyone blaming the RFL and claiming that there is favouritism though
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2019 19:32:56 GMT
Yes it’s an independent panel that have changed it to a suspended points deduction. Won’t stop everyone blaming the RFL and claiming that there is favouritism though They’ve got a point though- if the RFL rules are weak enough for an independent panel to rule that a three time offender gets zero points deducted then the rules are partly to blame. Agree that the anger over the points reversal itself and blaming the RFL specifically for this is a bit daft though. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2019 19:37:27 GMT
When Salfords appeal went to the same independent panel, the RFL were arguing for it to be increased and carried over to the middle 8s.
Thankfully this didn't happen. I suspect they didn't try the same approach with the mighty Wigan.
|
|
|
|
Post by redunderthebed on Mar 6, 2019 19:51:46 GMT
Yes it’s an independent panel that have changed it to a suspended points deduction. Won’t stop everyone blaming the RFL and claiming that there is favouritism though They’ve got a point though- if the RFL rules are weak enough for an independent panel to rule that a three time offender gets zero points deducted then the rules are partly to blame. Agree that the anger over the points reversal itself and blaming the RFL specifically for this is a bit daft though. Fair point. It’s hard to understand how an independent body can come to that conclusion with a repeat offender. I know this breach isn’t esp big. About £14k i think. But when they have previous... |
|
|
|
Post by redunderthebed on Mar 6, 2019 19:55:10 GMT
When Salfords appeal went to the same independent panel, the RFL were arguing for it to be increased and carried over to the middle 8s. Thankfully this didn't happen. I suspect they didn't try the same approach with the mighty Wigan. I was thinking that. To be fair Wigan have managed it better than our then owner did. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2019 20:02:34 GMT
|
|
